Sonic hedgehog activation is implicated in diosgenin-induced megakaryocytic differentiation of human erythroleukemia cells

International audienceDifferentiation therapy is a means to treat cancer and is induced by different agents with low toxicity and more specificity than traditional ones. Diosgenin, a plant steroid, is able to induce megakaryocytic differentiation or apoptosis in human HEL erythroleukemia cells in a dose-dependent manner. However, the exact mechanism by which diosgenin induces megakaryocytic differentiation has not been elucidated. In this study, we studied the involvement of Sonic Hedgehog in megakaryocytic differentiation induced by diosgenin in HEL cells. First, we showed that different elements of the Hedgehog pathway are expressed in our model by qRT-PCR. Then, we focused our interest on key elements in the Sonic Hedgehog pathway: Smoothened receptor, GLI transcription factor and the ligand Sonic Hedgehog. We showed that Smoothened and Sonic Hedgehog were overexpressed in disogenin-treated cells and that GLI transcription factors were activated. Then, we showed that SMO inhibition using siSMO or the GLI antagonist GANT-61, blocked megakaryocytic differentiation induced by diosgenin in HEL cells. Furthermore, we demonstrated that Sonic Hedgehog pathway inhibition led to inhibition of ERK1/2 activation, a major physiological pathway involved in megakaryocytic differentiation. In conclusion, our study reports, for the first time, a crucial role for the Sonic Hedgehog pathway in diosgenin-induced megakaryocytic differentiation in HEL cells

Cyclopamine and jervine induce COX-2 overexpression in human erythroleukemia cells but only cyclopamine has a pro-apoptotic effect.

International audienceErythroleukemia is generally associated with a very poor response and survival to current available therapeutic agents. Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) has been described to play a crucial role in the proliferation and differentiation of leukemia cells, this enzyme seems to play an important role in chemoresistance in different cancer types. Previously, we demonstrated that diosgenin, a plant steroid, induced apoptosis in HEL cells with concomitant COX-2 overexpression. In this study, we investigated the antiproliferative and apoptotic effects of cyclopamine and jervine, two steroidal alkaloids with similar structures, on HEL and TF1a human erythroleukemia cell lines and, for the first time, their effect on COX-2 expression. Cyclopamine, but not jervine, inhibited cell proliferation and induced apoptosis in these cells. Both compounds induced COX-2 overexpression which was responsible for apoptosis resistance. In jervine-treated cells, COX-2 overexpression was NF-κB dependent. Inhibition of NF-κB reduced COX-2 overexpression and induced apoptosis. In addition, cyclopamine induced apoptosis and COX-2 overexpression via PKC activation. Inhibition of the PKC pathway reduced both apoptosis and COX-2 overexpression in both cell lines. Furthermore, we demonstrated that the p38/COX-2 pathway was involved in resistance to cyclopamine-induced apoptosis since p38 inhibition reduced COX-2 overexpression and increased apoptosis in both cell lines

Ursolic Acid’s Alluring Journey: One Triterpenoid vs. Cancer Hallmarks

Cancer is a multifactorial disease characterized by various hallmarks, including uncontrolled cell growth, evasion of apoptosis, sustained angiogenesis, tissue invasion, and metastasis, among others. Traditional cancer therapies often target specific hallmarks, leading to limited efficacy and the development of resistance. Thus, there is a growing need for alternative strategies that can address multiple hallmarks concomitantly. Ursolic acid (UA), a naturally occurring pentacyclic triterpenoid, has recently emerged as a promising candidate for multitargeted cancer therapy. This review aims to summarize the current knowledge on the anticancer properties of UA, focusing on its ability to modulate various cancer hallmarks. The literature reveals that UA exhibits potent anticancer effects through diverse mechanisms, including the inhibition of cell proliferation, induction of apoptosis, suppression of angiogenesis, inhibition of metastasis, and modulation of the tumor microenvironment. Additionally, UA has demonstrated promising activity against different cancer types (e.g., breast, lung, prostate, colon, and liver) by targeting various cancer hallmarks. This review discusses the molecular targets and signaling pathways involved in the anticancer effects of UA. Notably, UA has been found to modulate key signaling pathways, such as PI3K/Akt, MAPK/ERK, NF-κB, and Wnt/β-catenin, which play crucial roles in cancer development and progression. Moreover, the ability of UA to destroy cancer cells through various mechanisms (e.g., apoptosis, autophagy, inhibiting cell growth, dysregulating cancer cell metabolism, etc.) contributes to its multitargeted effects on cancer hallmarks. Despite promising anticancer effects, this review acknowledges hurdles related to UA’s low bioavailability, emphasizing the need for enhanced therapeutic strategies

Shining a Light on Prostate Cancer: Photodynamic Therapy and Combination Approaches

International audienceProstate cancer is a major health concern worldwide, and current treatments, such as surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy, are associated with significant side effects and limitations. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a promising alternative that has the potential to provide a minimally invasive and highly targeted approach to treating prostate cancer. PDT involves the use of photosensitizers (PSs) that are activated by light to produce reactive oxygen species (ROS), which can induce tumor cell death. There are two main types of PSs: synthetic and natural. Synthetic PSs are classified into four generations based on their structural and photophysical properties, while natural PSs are derived from plant and bacterial sources. Combining PDT with other therapies, such as photothermal therapy (PTT), photoimmunotherapy (PIT), and chemotherapy (CT), is also being explored as a way to improve its efficacy. This review provides an overview of conventional treatments for prostate cancer, the underlying principles of PDT, and the different types of PSs used in PDT as well as ongoing clinical studies. It also discusses the various forms of combination therapy being explored in the context of PDT for prostate cancer, as well as the challenges and opportunities associated with this approach. Overall, PDT has the potential to provide a more effective and less invasive treatment option for prostate cancer, and ongoing research is aimed at improving its selectivity and efficacy in clinical settings

Shining a Light on Prostate Cancer: Photodynamic Therapy and Combination Approaches

Prostate cancer is a major health concern worldwide, and current treatments, such as surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy, are associated with significant side effects and limitations. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a promising alternative that has the potential to provide a minimally invasive and highly targeted approach to treating prostate cancer. PDT involves the use of photosensitizers (PSs) that are activated by light to produce reactive oxygen species (ROS), which can induce tumor cell death. There are two main types of PSs: synthetic and natural. Synthetic PSs are classified into four generations based on their structural and photophysical properties, while natural PSs are derived from plant and bacterial sources. Combining PDT with other therapies, such as photothermal therapy (PTT), photoimmunotherapy (PIT), and chemotherapy (CT), is also being explored as a way to improve its efficacy. This review provides an overview of conventional treatments for prostate cancer, the underlying principles of PDT, and the different types of PSs used in PDT as well as ongoing clinical studies. It also discusses the various forms of combination therapy being explored in the context of PDT for prostate cancer, as well as the challenges and opportunities associated with this approach. Overall, PDT has the potential to provide a more effective and less invasive treatment option for prostate cancer, and ongoing research is aimed at improving its selectivity and efficacy in clinical settings

Antitumoral activity of Caralluma europaea on colorectal and prostate cancer cell lines

International audienc

A novel form of melanoma apoptosis resistance: Melanogenesis up-regulation in apoptotic B16-F0 cells delays ursolic acid-triggered cell death

International audienc

Polyphenol-Based Nanoparticles: A Promising Frontier for Enhanced Colorectal Cancer Treatment

Colorectal cancer (CRC) poses a significant challenge in healthcare, necessitating the exploration of novel therapeutic strategies. Natural compounds such as polyphenols with inherent anticancer properties have gained attention as potential therapeutic agents. This review highlights the need for novel therapeutic approaches in CRC, followed by a discussion on the synthesis of polyphenols-based nanoparticles. Various synthesis techniques, including dynamic covalent bonding, non-covalent bonding, polymerization, chemical conjugation, reduction, and metal-polyphenol networks, are explored. The mechanisms of action of these nanoparticles, encompassing passive and active targeting mechanisms, are also discussed. The review further examines the intrinsic anticancer activity of polyphenols and their enhancement through nano-based delivery systems. This section explores the natural anticancer properties of polyphenols and investigates different nano-based delivery systems, such as micelles, nanogels, liposomes, nanoemulsions, gold nanoparticles, mesoporous silica nanoparticles, and metal–organic frameworks. The review concludes by emphasizing the potential of nanoparticle-based strategies utilizing polyphenols for CRC treatment and highlights the need for future research to optimize their efficacy and safety. Overall, this review provides valuable insights into the synthesis, mechanisms of action, intrinsic anticancer activity, and enhancement of polyphenols-based nanoparticles for CRC treatment

Effects of SMO and GLI1 inhibition on diosgenin-induced megakaryocytic differentiation in HEL cells.

<p>(<b>A</b>) Cells were transfected with siSMO or pretreated with 5µM GANT-61 for 48 h (G5) then treated with 10 µM diosgenin for 12, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h.SMO expression was evaluated by Western blot. GAPDH was used as a loading control. (<b>B</b>) Cells were pretreated with 5µM GANT-61 (G5) then treated with 10 µM diosgenin for 12, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h. GLI1 activation was evaluated by electromobility shift assay using the DIG Gel Shift Kit. The blots shown are representative of five separate experiments. (<b>C</b>) Cells were transfected with siSMO or pretreated with 5µM GANT-61 (G5) then treated with 10 µM diosgenin for 96 h. Megakaryocytic differentiation was assessed by analyzing nuclear ploidy. (<b>D</b>) Cells were transfected with siSMO or pretreated with 5µM GANT-61 (G5) then treated with 10 µM diosgenin for 5, 20 min, 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 h. ERK1/2 phosphorylation was quantified using DuoSet IC assay kit. Each value represents the mean ± SEM of three separate experiments, * P< 0.05 siSMO+diosgenin or GANT-61+ diosgenin <i>vs</i>. diosgenin, # P< 0.05 diosgenin <i>vs</i>. control.</p